Chamber and committees

What answer did you get from the head of the Care Inspectorate when you asked that question?

You have provided some very good evidence this morning. Several of us have noted possible amendments that we could make to the bill. I hope that it will not frighten you to hear that you have made some suggestions on that front, but it has been most helpful and you have provided some sound, grounded advice for us about independence, representation, not being report heavy and the accreditation function, which we are grateful for.

You said earlier—I am summarising—that you probably would not have started from here, with structural reform first; you might have done the other bits first and come to that later. You hoped that this was the start of a wider reform process, and I heard an emphasis on the hope but also some scepticism that that would take place.

In upcoming Parliament business, we will have a statement on Thursday from the cabinet secretary about qualifications and assessment. I think that she has been cautious. We do not know what will be in the statement, but the cabinet secretary has indicated caution. Having said that you hoped that this is going to be part of a wider reform, what message would you have for the cabinet secretary in advance of Thursday?

I have one final question. According to the cabinet secretary—I am paraphrasing what she says—there is enough going on in the education system, such as additional support needs, violent behaviour, distress, and absence from school, and that perhaps big-bang reforms now would not be appropriate. Do you agree with that?

Professor Donaldson, you indicated earlier that the pace of change was much faster than other people thought and that it needed to be much faster than 10 years. However, later on, you said that doing reform without any money is not advisable. How do you square those two things?

What should the cabinet secretary announce tomorrow in her statement?

I have a brief question about the separation of the accreditation function. It seems to me that the Government—you will have had discussions with it—is resistant to creating additional public bodies. You believe that, if the responsibility was given to Education Scotland, it would be too close to Government, which would be subject to criticism. Is there another body that the accreditation function could sit alongside? Perhaps the inspectorate could house the body. Have you had any further thoughts about the practicalities of where it could go?

To be clear, you and your team offered up the flexible workforce development fund for removal.

Wow!

You sound like a passive observer on the matter. Are you fighting in the Government to get more money for colleges, apprenticeships and universities? They have had a pretty rough deal over the past decade. Will that change?

You do not know where the money is coming from? You criticise this committee and Opposition members all the time for offering up extra expenditure without knowing where the money is coming from, and you have done exactly the same. How can you come before the committee and tell us that you do not know where the money is coming from?